Redskins, Seahawks rally behind rookies
WASHINGTON — How convenient. Those who can't decide between Robert Griffin III and Russell Wilson are literally getting a playoff.
RG3 or RW3? They've only had two of the best two rookie seasons for quarterbacks in NFL history, according to the numbers. Time to compare and contrast as much as possible Sunday as Griffin's Washington Redskins host Wilson's Seattle Seahawks in the NFC's wild-card round.
“I don't play against quarterbacks. It's not my job to compare us,” Griffin told reporters this week. “You guys will do that. ... I hope you guys have fun.”
Hey, Redskins Pro Bowl left tackle Trent Williams, why is your guy better than theirs?
“I definitely would take his hair over Russell Wilson's hair,” Williams said. “He's taller. He has a couple of more endorsements than Russell does. That gives you grounds enough to take RG3 over Wilson. Way cooler TV commercials.”
Griffin is charisma personified, always ready with a humorous quip and the ready-made sound bite. Wilson can be engaging but often speaks in clichés. Or, as he put it: “I'm not about flash.”
Griffin crashed coach Mike Shanahan's news conference Wednesday, asking the coach how he spent his New Year's. It's hard to imagine Pete Carroll getting the same shtick from Wilson.
“He's always serious, even when we're not supposed to be serious,” Seahawks fullback Michael Robinson said. “He's always serious. That's a good thing. But I don't know, man, he's always working. It's hard to pinpoint his personality.”
Sunday's game will be the second in NFL playoff history with two starting rookie quarterbacks, but this is a case where both the winner and loser are expected to prosper.
“Even though they have totally different styles in how they carry themselves,” Seahawks coach Pete Carroll said, “in the core, they're really the real deal.”
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.